uad_set_clock

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Despite having no annotations, the description fully discloses critical behaviors: it verifies ClockLocked after changing, automatically reverts if the new source doesn't lock, requires confirm=true, and refuses while audio is flowing. This exceeds the typical level of behavioral detail and prepares the agent for side effects and safety conditions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is four concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then covering usage context, requirements, and exclusions. Every sentence adds meaningful information with no redundancy or filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (2 params, output schema present), the description covers the operation, prerequisites, failure recovery behavior, use cases, and alternatives. The presence of an output schema means return-value details aren't needed, and the description is complete for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema has no description coverage and no enums on parameters, but the description compensates fully: it lists valid values for 'source' and explicitly states that 'confirm' must be true for the operation to proceed. This adds actionable semantics beyond the bare schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Change') with a clear resource ('clock source'), and enumerates the exact selectable sources (Internal, Word Clock, ADAT, S/PDIF). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling uad_set_sample_rate, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit 'Use when' scenarios (slaving to/from external gear, recovering from unlocked clock) and a 'Not for' exclusion that names the correct alternative tool (uad_set_sample_rate). This gives clear guidance for when to choose this tool over siblings.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.